zlacker

>>joseph+(OP)
>This does not mean that Google is making Android a closed-source platform, but rather that the open-source aspect will only be released when a new branch is released to AOSP with those changes, including when new full versions or maintenance releases are finished.

I'll believe it when I see it. These days, words are basically meaningless from these large tech companies. Actions are what matter.

at the very least, I'm not convinced this internal branch and AOSP will be close to feature parity if they do throw some stuff out.

>>johnny+N8
No OEM is interested in AOSP builds, because no one is going to buy an Android phone without Google Play Services, which is required for many popular apps to work (banking, games). There were some Chinese OEMs that ran an Android build and have unofficial ways to get Play Store working (Boox eReaders for example), but those are increasingly rare now, as years of sanctions has led to Huawei de-Googling itself fast, with others following.

>>rchaud+We
So one of the giants will build their version of microg and it will be like with wine, proton and steam os.

>>npodbi+ms
Except that attestation (Play Integrity) exists, and its usage by the apps on the Play Store seems to be increasing exponentially (if I'm not mistaken it only takes enabling a switch now to have it in your app).

>>g-b-r+uG
Play Integrity and Attestation are distinctly different things. Attestation is a far better solution as it's not literally controlled by Google like the Play Integrity API is.

GrapheneOS actually explicitly pushes for services to switch away from Play Integrity API or SafetyNet API towards the Android Attestation API for that reason.

https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-gu...

And notably, long term if Google becomes an unreliable maintainer for Android, the other major Android providers are likely to coordinate a list of "approved signing keys" so that apps can use those with the standard Android HW Attestation API.